playwright vs open-code-review
Two of the top projects in Code review and testing, side by side: who leads on each score part and who each one suits, then setup, license, activity and what each review found.
playwright
Cross-browser automation and end-to-end test framework for Chromium, Firefox and WebKit
open-code-review
CLI that reviews Git diffs with an LLM agent and line-level comments
Verdict
playwright ranks higher, 94 to 91. Of the 4 score parts we measure for both, playwright leads on 2, open-code-review on 1 and 1 is even.
- Adoptionplaywright leads by 7 points, 99 to 92.
- FreshnessEven at 100.
- Maintenanceplaywright leads by 11 points, 99 to 88.
- Agent-readyopen-code-review leads by 25 points, 70 to 45: a wide gap.
Pick playwright if you are
Engineers writing browser tests or automation, or giving agents browser access
- One API covers Chromium, Firefox and WebKit on Linux, macOS and Windows, headless or headed
- Test runner has auto-waiting, retrying assertions, per-test browser contexts and parallel execution
Pick open-code-review if you are
Teams adding LLM code review to local workflows or CI pipelines
- Deterministic file selection and bundling; each bundle runs as an isolated sub-agent
- Reviews workspace changes, branch ranges, single commits, or full files via `ocr scan`
| What we compare | playwright | open-code-review |
|---|---|---|
| Score parts, out of 100 | ||
| Adoption | 99, widely used | 92, widely used |
| Freshness | 100, active | 100, active |
| Maintenance | 99, healthy | 88, healthy |
| Agent-ready | 45, minimal | 70, partly |
| Facts from GitHub and the README | ||
| Stars | 99k | 49.2k |
| License | Apache-2.0 (permissive) | Apache-2.0 (permissive) |
| Last commit | Oct 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| Last release | Oct 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| Language | TypeScript | Go |
| Docker | No | No |
| GPU | Not needed | Not needed |
| arm64 or Apple Silicon | Not stated | Mentioned |
playwright
Playwright drives Chromium, Firefox and WebKit through one API, used for end-to-end tests with the Playwright Test runner, for standalone scripts such as screenshots, PDFs and scraping, and as a browser tool for AI agents. The agent paths are a CLI for coding agents and an MCP server that exposes pages as accessibility snapshots. Bindings exist for TypeScript/JavaScript, Python, .NET and Java.
Who it is for: Engineers writing browser tests or automation, or giving agents browser access
Strengths
- One API covers Chromium, Firefox and WebKit on Linux, macOS and Windows, headless or headed
- Test runner has auto-waiting, retrying assertions, per-test browser contexts and parallel execution
- Trace Viewer records DOM snapshots, network requests and console logs; VS Code extension adds codegen
- Agent tooling: MCP server uses accessibility snapshots, so no vision model is needed
Weaknesses
- Browser binaries must be downloaded separately with `npx playwright install`
- MCP server and CLI live in separate repos, not in this one
- Agent features are secondary; the core is a testing and automation library
- no GPU
- Needs Node.js, Browser binaries via npx playwright install
open-code-review
Open Code Review is a Go CLI (`ocr`) that reads a Git diff, groups related files into bundles, and runs each bundle through a tool-using LLM agent that produces structured review comments. File selection, rule matching, comment positioning and reflection are done by deterministic code rather than prompts. `ocr scan` reviews whole files when there is no diff, and delegation mode lets an existing coding agent do the review with its own model.
Who it is for: Teams adding LLM code review to local workflows or CI pipelines
Strengths
- Deterministic file selection and bundling; each bundle runs as an isolated sub-agent
- Reviews workspace changes, branch ranges, single commits, or full files via `ocr scan`
- Sessions can be resumed and browsed in a viewer; JSON output for automation
- Plugins for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Kimi Code, OpenCode; CI docs for GitHub, GitLab, Gerrit
Weaknesses
- Requires Git >= 2.41 and a configured LLM endpoint, unless delegation mode is used
- Recall is lower than general-purpose agents by the README's own benchmark
- Benchmark figures are published by the project itself, not independently verified
- No Docker or Compose files detected
- no GPU
- Needs Git >= 2.41, LLM provider API
- Models: configurable LLM providers, custom providers
More in Code review and testing
Building with these?
We help teams pick an open-source AI stack and run it in production. Client work never changes a rank.